Home > Abortion, Ethics > The Ethics of Abortion

The Ethics of Abortion

When I was in college, I took a Women’s Studies class with a friend from High School that was attending college with me.  She and I were in the same discussion group with about 12 other students.  (I was the only male in the group.)  When we came to the topic of abortion, the general consensus of the rest of the discussion group was, “I would never want to have an abortion, but I would defend a woman’s right to choose.”  After class my friend and I were walking home.  She said to me, “That’s stupid.  If abortion is okay, then they should totally feel fine having one.  Either it’s okay or it’s not.  I believe abortion is okay, so I would definitely have one if I needed it.”  Though she and I disagreed about the conclusion, we both agreed that the consensus position of the rest of the class was not logically consistent.

The problem, I think, is that almost everyone agrees that abortion is not good and all women should try to avoid having one.  But why?  Here’s where so many people break down.  If abortion is not good, then it is not good for some ethical reason.  The only real reason available for why abortion would be not good is because it is taking the life of an innocent victim.  Most people would define taking an innocent life as murder.  So if abortion is wrong, it is wrong because it is murder.  The corollary is that, if abortion is not murder, then it is not wrong – ever.

By saying, “I would never want to have an abortion,” the rest of the students in my class implicitly agreed with me (against my friend) that abortion is not good.  But if it is not good, the reason it is not good is because it is murder.  It is absolutely unfathomable to me how someone could believe that an act is murder and yet think it is an individual’s right to decide whether to commit that act.  Imagine if we did that with fratricide: “Personally I believe killing your brother is wrong, but I would defend someone’s right to make his own decision whether he will kill his brother.”  What about abandoning your infant?  No one is allowed to make her own choice about whether she will leave her 3-month-old son or daughter to the elements to be killed.  It is wrong, for everyone, at all times.  If abortion is murder then it is profoundly wrong to allow anyone “the right to choose.”

Of course there are all kinds of issues involved.  And I have no desire to minimize any of them: the economic situation of the woman, the difficulties of being a single mother, the conflicting emotions, the unwillingness of the father to fulfill his responsibilities, limited opportunities for the child, etc.  But the exact same issues exist six months after the baby is born as exist six months before the baby is born.  No one argues that any of these would make it okay for a mother to smother her baby that has already been born.  If these factors do not change the ethics of murdering a tiny baby, then they similarly cannot change the ethics of aborting a fetus.  They are the same.

There is simply no way around this conclusion without just shutting your eyes.  That is why I simply cannot fathom the pro-choice position.  In my mind this should not be a partisan issue.  Liberals and conservatives alike should be able to band together against it.  If we can all come together to take a stand against racism, how much more ought we to come together against abortion.  Please don’t fool yourself into thinking this is a “gray issue”.  It is as ethically unambiguous as the question of whether it is okay to kill your own parents.  It is not.

Advertisements
  1. November 9, 2008 at 10:30 pm

    Just wondering but are there things that we think are wrong and that we don’t beleive we would ever do but that we would still defend people’s rights to do?

    I can think of joining the military as a possible example. I could never do that and I have personal beliefs (or at least questions) about the appropriateness of a Christian joining the military of any country but I don’t know that I would call a Christian evil for doing so or say that they shouldn’t have the right to do so.

    Related to this is how we respond to violence. I hope that I wouldn’t respond to violence with violence and I think based on the teaching Jesus that it is wrong and that we should turn the other cheek, however I wouldn’t tell someone else that they should not defend themselves against violence or that they shouldn’t have any right to.

    Related to this I can think of owning guns. I personally am not comfortable with the idea of Christians owning guns. I guess I would say it’s wrong to own guns (I’m kind of iffy on this) but I still would defend the right of all law abiding citizens to own guns.

    Another example would be divorce. I mean most of us think that is permissible in the case of abuse and infidelity but would we argue that someone should not be allowed to divorce for other reasons?

    Another issue would be how we accumilate and spend wealth. I think it is wrong to be greedy and horde all of your money and use it just to fund an extravagant lifestyle solely devoted to your own desires and pleasure but I wouldn’t try taking away peoples right to do so (although I might vote to put them in a higher tax bracket : )

    I mean it seems if we really think about it we would say there are all kinds of things that we might think are wrong and we would never do but we would still defend the rights of people in our secular country to do. I don’t know that abortion is one of those things. I just don’t see it following that if you think something is wrong that it should be outlawed in a secular society or that either something is ok or it’s not (as if it’s ok for others it should be ok for you too).

    Maybe I’m missing what you were trying to say.

    Bryan L

  2. steph
    November 10, 2008 at 2:07 am

    I was going to say a similar thing to Byan. Smoking is one thing. You might not do it yourself and think it is wrong but would you deny others if they did it in private not endangering the health of others?

    I don’t think abortion is good but I don’t think it is murder. I don’t think pro choice people do think it is murdering a “baby” as you seem to imply. I don’t approve of it as a contraceptive because it is destroying an embryo which could become a child but I understand that in some circumstances it is better to abort. I would never have an abortion but that is because I would welcome pregnancy and would have support if I conceived and had a baby. Maybe that is the case too with your friend. But like her I wouldn’t deny others having the choice. In any case, have you the several million safe and capable adoptive parents a year needed to take all unwanted babies should abortion be outlawed?

  3. Diana
    November 10, 2008 at 9:37 am

    Personally, I think the difference between abortion being compared to joining the military or violence, is that there is no cut and dry right or wrong with those items. Some Christians whole heartedly agree that if a person is attacked, they have the right to defend themselves. The area where they turn the other cheek is when they are being persecuted for proclaiming the gospel and defending Jesus. I haven’t thought this part through much, but I have heard thoughts like this in various circles. Honestly, I have heard stories of violent attackers being put to chase just at the name of Jesus and a rebuke from the victim (a good way to avoid violence). Regardless, abortion is just as bad as murdering someone who has been living. In many states it is a crime to murder a baby (or fetus) while in the mother’s womb (not including abortions). If that is the case, than how can killing of an unborn child (abortion) be alright if it is chosen by the parent, when if someone else were to kill their unborn child they could serve time.

    I truly believe that sin is sin – be it adultery, murder, or any one of the other 10 Commandments. The great thing is that regardless of which sin is committed, when we come to Jesus and repent, he forgives all. If we lived in a completely Christian society where everyone followed after God, life would be different, but since we live in the world, people are going to do things that don’t agree with the Bible. Oh well. I guess we’ll just have to keep sharing Jesus with them and continue to stand up for truth.

  4. steph
    November 10, 2008 at 5:18 pm

    The point is Diana that some people think that they have a right to abort an embryo before it grows into a baby. They don’t think this is murder whereas I consider air strikes by foreign troops to be murder. The Bible is quite ambiguous on the subject of abortion. However it condones foreign aggression which is probably another reason I’m not religious.

  5. November 10, 2008 at 8:44 pm

    O.K. ….Let’s recognize the cards on the table….we’re clearing dealing with a Roman Catholic here…..They’ve been taught….that masturbation is sin! Come on folks! Every sperm is sacred? Give me a break! I don’t want to have anything to do with a deity that would make something so pleasurable and than tell his creatures not to do it! Shall we close down all the fertility clinics?! They are involved with murder….according to these folks. Do some research on what happens in countries where the R.C. Church runs the show. Oh yeah….just read your history books…and you’ll find out about the the good ol’ days in the U.S.A. when you had back alley abortions with coat hangers…. fortunately, Barack Obama was just voted President of the United States and he’ll be sure to choose judges who have a bit of compassion and wisdom. Where do men…like this writer…get off telling women how to make these decisions?! Check out “Driving in Cars with Boys”, with Drew Barrymore….it’s a fantastic example of all the terrible consequences of not….having that abortion. Check out “Freakonomics”. It has a great chapter which demonstrates statistically that “The Woman” who does or does not carry a foetus to term….is the one best suited to making that decision. But…oh yeah…let’s get back to R.C. Doctrine….it’s not enough that they want to take away a woman’s right to privacy…which includes a right to abortion…..they also want to force people into getting pregnant….because you see…they don’t allow birth control!!!!!! In a world run by such thinking….women are merely baby factories. Guess what country has more unwanted teen pregnancies in the world….go on guess…you got it…The U.S.A. …..and why is that….a lot of religious types…..telling their kids not to have pre-marital sex, masturbation is a sin, birth control is a sin, abortion is a sin. Unfortunately for your teens….they have these things….called hormones….these issues need to be faced honestly and pro-actively. The Silver Ring Thing is a big sham. I’d prefer abortions to be as rare as possible…the only way you’ll get that…is lots of information on preventing pregnancy through birth control and it’s easy availability.

  6. November 10, 2008 at 9:24 pm

    The point I’m trying to make is starting with this common ground: if an act constitutes murder, then it ought to be outlawed. I guess I hadn’t actually moved on to talking about the legality of it in this post. But that’s the general idea. We are all agreed that murder is wrong – objectively wrong.

    So the question is what constitutes murder. I suspect that if we pressed it, we would all agree that there are some forms of killing that do not constitute murder. Killing enemies in war, for instance, is not considered murder by most people; killing civilians is.

    We can quibble about what is and is not murder. But if we agree that it is murder, then I take it for granted that we agree that it should be banned, made illegal, or whatever. Bryan, yes there are some things I think are wrong but would defend another’s right to do it. But never with murder. I think we all agree that it murder is wrong and never defensible on any grounds.

    My point is this: if Abortion is not good, then the reason it is not good is because it is murder. This is the point I expect people to disagree. If you want to defend a woman’s right to choose, then you simply must try to redefine it so that it is not murder. This is especially important if you’ve actually had one.

    If abortion is not murder, then what is it about Abortion that makes us feel so crappy about it? I suggest that we feel crappy because we all know that it is really taking an innocent life. Or turn it around: if Abortion is not murder, then what is there to feel bad about? Why not embrace it wholeheartedly? Why not conceive children for the sole purpose of aborting them for stem cell research? This was the position of my college friend.

    The thrust of my argument is simply this: if abortion is bad, wrong, or not good, then the reason is because it is actually murder; if abortion were not murder, then there would be no reason for us to think it not good, wrong, or bad.

    For the record, I am opposed to using the Bible to argue against Abortion. The reason is because Abortion is a human rights issue. Lots of reasonable people disagree about matters of faith, but no reasonable person in our society disagrees about murder.

    Finally, if there is anyone following this discussion that has had an abortion, I am not trying to lay a guilt trip on you, though neither am I pulling any punches. This is a weighty issue and the pastoral issues involved are different than the ethical debate that we are having here.

  7. November 10, 2008 at 10:15 pm

    Robyn, there is a lot going on in your comment. I don’t have time to hit every point. Here are the main issues:

    (1) Feel free to write directly to me. I read my own blog. Just as I am writing directly to you, it is appropriate to acknowledge that you are writing to me. I much prefer this than to be referred to in third person as, “the writer.”

    (2) I am not Roman Catholic. If you want a box to put me in, I am an Evangelical. We are very different. I share many of your concerns about the Roman Catholic church and doctrines. If you care to figure out who Evangelicals are in our own words, check out the Evangelical Manifesto, which I reviewed a few months ago.

    (3) You ask, “Where do men…like this writer…get off telling women how to make these decisions?!” What you are advancing here is called the genetic fallacy: thinking that calling attention to the source of the argument (in this case, an argument advanced by a man) refutes the argument. The argument stands or falls on its own. My gender has no bearing on the soundness of my argument.

    (4) The coat-hanger argument is a very powerful image because it is so graphic. (Not as graphic as seeing the process of an abortion itself, but graphic nonetheless.) Certainly none of us would want to force women to have to go to these “back alley” clinics. My answer is that of course I don’t want women risking their lives in order to get an abortion. Neither do I want them risking their lives in order to terminate the life of their six-month old children. My point is that if it can be established that abortion is murder, then the “back alley abortion” argument is merely one more smoke screen blind us to the human rights violation of the unborn child that happens in abortion.

    (4) I am seriously wondering whether you even read the post. As far as I can tell, you may as well cut-and-paste this same text on any website that argues against abortion. The fact that you did not engage my actual argument leads me to believe that you have no valid counter-argument.

  8. steph
    November 11, 2008 at 1:26 am

    We do not agree that abortion is murder. Murder is killing of a human being. An embryo is not a human being. Abortion is neither good nor not good. In some circumstances it is better than not, that’s all. I might never have had one but that is because I would have loved to have had a baby. However if my circumstances were very different, or I was raped, I can’t possibly say. But just to say if it is not good it must be murder, is missing the point.

  9. November 11, 2008 at 5:06 am

    RT:
    I don’t want to sound like I’m arguing in favor of abortion or that I think it is ok. I’m just trying to provide another perspective here and point out where your argument may not convince someone who doesn’t already agree with you. I just wanted to be clear about that. I don’t consider myself pro-choice (although I’m not sure where I stand in regards to abortion because of rape, incest or the life of the mother).

    As Steph mentioned just because people see abortion as undesirable that doesn’t mean it’s because they beleive it is murder. Not all ending of life is considered murder. If someone kills someone in self defense we usually don’t say they murdered them. If a soldier or a police officer kills someone in the line of duty who was a threat to others we don’t say they murdered them. We don’t call accidental killings murder. And then if you don’t believe that an embryo or fetus is a human being on the same level as a child or adult then you might not consider it murder either but maybe just the unfortunate ending of a life (like euthanizing a pet or something).

    Still the question comes to mind which I asked last week on my blog: “Is it worse for someone to think that abortion isn’t murder and therefor they don’t do anything to stop it? Or is it worse for a person to think abortion is murder yet they still don’t do anything to stop it?”

    With so much talk from Christians about abortion being murder I’m a bit shocked that they don’t do more to stop what they believe is a holocaust and the most pressing issue of our generation.

    Bryan L

  10. November 11, 2008 at 11:35 pm

    Steph, I suggest that the reaction of the other students in class is fundamentally different than yours or my friend’s. The way you write about abortion, it seems similar to having your appendix out. It is neither good nor bad in itself, and if you don’t need it taken out, it is an undesirable procedure. I think this is a fair comparison based on what you have said.

    Now consider the reaction of the other students. If they had said, “I would never want my appendix taken out, but I would defend someone else’s right to have it done,” something sounds strange about it. They are essentially acknowledging that there is something implicitly wrong about it when they affirm that they would never want to have one.

    My argument is simply that if abortion is wrong (as most people implicitly affirm, though you and my friend would deny), then the only reason available for why it can be wrong is because it is murder. Those people, I suggest, have a moral obligation to acknowledge the logical conclusion of their own premises.

    I applaud your commitment to logically consistency. I think you agree with my argument that if abortion is morally wrong, it must be wrong because it is murder. But you believe abortion is not murder. This allows you to conclude that abortion is not morally wrong in any sense, ever. It is simply a medical procedure. The only problem is that this conclusion seems so counter-intuitive. There is something about it that doesn’t seem right. It is at this point that I am somewhat dumbfounded by your (and my friend’s) view. You really can say, deep in your heart, that nothing is wrong, nothing is undesirable about abortion?

    Bryan, I recognize that not all ending of life is considered murder. And I don’t know that I can give an acceptable definition of what does and does not constitute murder. But I think we all (you, I, steph, Robyn, and others) can agree that a fetus must be considered not to be a human being on the same level as a child or adult in order for abortion not to be murder. In other words, if a fetus is a full human being, then abortion is murder. Again, the corollary is that, if abortion is not murder, then a fetus must not be a human being.

    My response is that, if a fetus is not a human being, what species is it? There are no other candidates.

    If the fetus is a human being, as I am arguing, then abortion is a gross human rights violation, as bad or worse as human slave trafficking, child abuse, exploitation, or anything else.

    Bryan, your last point is the most haunting. First, though, I actually think there is very little talk anymore about abortion. We’re sick of talking about it. It’s divisive and we think no one ever changes their minds. There are so many people like Robyn that simply don’t want have a discussion, blow off my argument, label me a bad guy, and proceed to the talking points. How can I even begin to have civil discourse with someone who won’t listen?

    But second, what would you have us do? Picket abortion clinics? Bomb them? Fight for more legislation? Honestly I feel powerless about it. All I know to do is talk about it in an effort to persuade people that this is not a conservative/liberal issue, it is a human rights issue. What other ideas do you have?

  11. steph
    November 12, 2008 at 1:22 am

    I think people who say they defend other people having abortions but they would never have one, don’t really know. They might firmly believe they never would, but put them in a ghetto, rape them, endanger their life, or take away a stable home, and they could just change their mind. I used to say I would never have one too, until I thought more about it and possible scenarios.

    Bryan: I think anti abortionist do plenty of things trying to convince people against it. Consider Michael Barber’s Catholic blog Singing in the Reign for example. He posts on his blog a plea to all Christians not to vote for Obama with an atrocious video and list of bishops who appeal against voting for Obama with the threat from Bishop Finn, of their eternal salvation if they do. And then there is Stan Mc something who has a blog and rails against Obama because he is a “baby murderer” who wants to “expand abortion” and “dismember babies”. There was much distortion of the truth in order to inject fear into voters before the election.

  12. November 12, 2008 at 7:20 am

    steph, one of the factors that continues to motivate me is the consequence for being wrong. If I’m wrong, I would be encouraging more adoptions than would otherwise be necessary. I suspect that very, very few babies that are born instead of aborted will grow up to regret the fact that they were not aborted. On the other hand, if you are wrong, the implications are tremendous. You would be actively supporting a human rights violation. You would be on par with American Christians in the South who used the Bible to support slavery. Are you so sure of yourself? Don’t the consequences if you’re wrong bother you?

  13. steph
    November 12, 2008 at 5:11 pm

    I’m not using the Bible to support my case. That would be a very flawed methodology in my opinion. I’ve seen the Bible used to condemn homosexuality and deny them the same rights and liberties of heterosexuals. I find this as wicked a using the Bible to support slavery and justify war. I am sure of my position on abortion. I’m surprised you question that.

  14. November 12, 2008 at 7:04 pm

    “But second, what would you have us do? Picket abortion clinics? Bomb them? Fight for more legislation? Honestly I feel powerless about it. All I know to do is talk about it in an effort to persuade people that this is not a conservative/liberal issue, it is a human rights issue. What other ideas do you have?”

    I don’t know RT. But just talking about it on the internet and slamming pro-choicers (the strategy of many on conservative Christian blogs) is probably about as effective as doing nothing.

    I guess my point is that if pro-lifers really think abortion is the same as murdering a child or an adult and worse than the holocaust but all they do is talk about it and vote a particular way every four years then I think they are delusional concerning their innocence in the matter. They’ll be just as guilty for not doing more were God to judge us because of it. Heck maybe they’ll be more guilty because they actually thought it was the worst evil around yet weren’t willing to inconvenience their lives that much nor make any real sacrifice because of it.

    Honestly I think pro-choicers and people ont he fence would probably take pro-lifers more serious if pro-lifers actually got more serious and were willing to sacrifice something. Instead it just seems pro-lifers want to tell people what to do but don’t actually give a flip about them nor do they want to help them bear their burdens.

    As Greg Boyd like to emphasize concerning Christians and politics, the common approach of pro-lifers seems to be a power over instead of power under way of dealing with abortion.

    Bryan L

  15. Diana
    November 12, 2008 at 9:09 pm

    Personally, I want to be more active in calling congress members and working the political route. I have even considered volunteering at Pregnancy Help Center’s where they provide help for those that are pregnant and not sure what to do (unfortunately, it is extremely difficult to find the spare time at this point in my life). Supporting people with finances and time seems like the best way to make a difference. The last statistics that I saw were that the number of abortions has been on the decline for the past 10 years. That is great news. I just hope that this continues. For those interested, there is a petition you can sign in order to let congress members know how you feel about the FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act (www.fightfoca.com). There is so much that can happen if FOCA is passed…

  16. November 12, 2008 at 10:35 pm

    steph, what I don’t understand is how you can go through life without questioning your views on this. For me, I live my life questioning everything I believe about everything. I am constantly asking what are the consequences if I’m wrong. I do that because I am human and fallible. If there was just one chance in ten that I am right in my view that abortion is murder, heck, if there was just one chance in a hundred, then I think you owe it to yourself to question what the implications of being wrong are.

    Bryan, I’m not sure what blogs you’re reading. I guess I don’t read those blogs. I hope you are not implying that I am slamming pro-choicers.

    I’m not sure what Greg Boyd’s vision of ‘power under’ would look like. I suppose Diana’s idea of volunteering might be a good start. How about you, Bryan? From everything I know about you, I think you basically agree with me, at least on the major points. What should we do?

  17. steph
    November 13, 2008 at 1:27 am

    Of course I have an open mind. When I studied biology I learned how an embryo evolves. I have never believed this embryo is a “baby”. Nothing has changed my mind so far. I used to be against abortion except in special circumstances but I’ve modified that view somewhat. Alot of this is due to “pro lifers” and life experience. I don’t constantly question whether I am right or wrong. I just keep an open mind and carry on listening and reading. There is a difference and I have more commitment than that. Do you constantly worry whether God exists or whether Jesus really rose from the dead?

  18. November 13, 2008 at 7:24 am

    No and Yes. I actually do return quite frequently to the question of Jesus’ resurrection. But the point is not how often you worry whether you are right. The point is how often you are considering the consequences if you are wrong. On that point, I think much more frequently about my commitment to theism. If monotheism is false, then my actions would be strange but not generally unethical in a nihilistic, polytheistic, or pantheistic world. If there was a particular act that is ethical only in a theistic world but unethical if I am wrong, I will be VERY cautious and continually rethink my position. I think this way of thinking is more or less obligatory for all moral beings.

  19. November 13, 2008 at 6:24 pm

    Ryan:

    I’m not implying that you’re slamming pro-choicers nor that you’re one of those blogs. If I thought you were I wouldn’t even bother commenting because it’s basically impossible to have a discussion on tough issues like this with them.

    “I’m not sure what Greg Boyd’s vision of ‘power under’ would look like. I suppose Diana’s idea of volunteering might be a good start. How about you, Bryan? From everything I know about you, I think you basically agree with me, at least on the major points. What should we do?”

    It would definitely call for more sacrifice and less talk. That’s a personal issue for people between them and God but I think at the least most would have to be honest and say they aren’t really sacrificing anything. Even the volunteering that often takes place is the normal little bit people do to make their conscience feel good and like they go above and beyond regular people (sort of the way short term mission trips often work).

    I guess the thing I find hard to beleive is that people really see abortion as murder when their actions don’t reflect it. How are others supposed to think it is as bad as they say. In reality it just appears to be a bunch of self righteous rhetoric.

    Bryan

  20. November 13, 2008 at 10:27 pm

    Bryan, I appreciate what you’re trying to say, but I still have absolutely no idea what it means in practice. More sacrifice… how exactly? The only thing that comes to mind is getting radical like bombing abortion clinics. Apart from that, there’s volunteering, talking, and legislating. Honestly. I really don’t know what other options there are. Fast and pray, I guess. That’s sacrificial. And spiritual. But not particularly what I think you have in mind. Really though, I don’t know what else you could be talking about. I would like more specifics of what kind of sacrifice you mean.

  21. November 15, 2008 at 7:26 am

    Ryan:

    Really it’s up to those who believe abortion is equivalent to murdering a baby or an adult and that a holocaust is taking place in America to decide what is their appropriate action response to abortion. What would they do if th ey thought this was actually taking place with children or adults.Sure some people might believe more extreme measures are called for (which I understand but I am also prone to disagree with since I’m not sure aborting an embryo is equivalent to murdering children). I think Christians can probably do more with non-violent measures anyway and still keep their witness strong. At the least it seems more sacrificing of comfort, security and status is needed. I mean tree huggers tie themselves to trees that are supposed to be cut down. I don’t see pro-lifers chaining themselves to the doors of abortion clinics or offering to pay the medical bills and adopt the child of the woman going into an abortion clinic, or staging sit ins inside the clinics. Are there any Christian organizations that offer to help financially these women in inner cities who beleive they can’t afford any more children (instead of letting welfare take care of them)? Are there Christian organizations offering free (or extremely cheap) day care in the inner cities for people who beleive another child is just a financial burden that they cant afford (some of these solutions are problems that can be addressed that contribute to women choosing abortions)? Is it really so hard to think of ways to respond to something that many see as the worst evil of our generation? Do you really beleive as a Christian all you can do is vote every 4 years, talk about it on the internet and volunteer every now and then? Really?

    Bryan L

  22. November 17, 2008 at 8:07 pm

    Greetings Again,
    Evangelical…then is it? Peculiar to be fond of Mother Theresa….not generally an evangelical hero…but never mind.
    No…it’s not wrong…Abortion has been a way of life throughout history in many cultures around the world. It is the beliefs that you are raised with…or choose to adopt which makes you see it in this way. As a student of science, I would not favor late term abortions unless the life of the mother was at stake…but those can be as rare as possible….as long as we make sure that the proper information and means to avoid pregnancy in the first place are readily available….it is amongst the religious repressed that unwanted pregnancies are most likely. Teenagers sneaking around…filled with thoughts of judgement by parents or God…unprepared….careless….careless…careless. There is no reason why in this day and age….that any unwanted pregnancies should occur…of course they will….and the sooner that they are dealt with the better. Unwanted children are far more likely to grow up to be criminals than those raised in homes that wanted them. We do the world no favors by bringing people into it…..that are not wanted…and not just anyone…can want them…oh…adoptive parents can be a great help…but at the end of the day…..if the biological parents didn’t…it will have it’s impact upon them….and by extension upon society.

    At the biological level….egg and sperm together have the potential to be human…they are not a human…they are the genetic material from two humans. It is irresponsible to allow this potentiality to grow to full humanness…if it is unwanted…the sooner it is flushed out of the system the better…if the woman is not planning on giving it a chance to fully develop…and that..since she is the home for that development is absolutely and totally her decision…nature has given that choice to her. She is the one who will consciously or unconsciously know whether or not she is in a position to give a good home for this offspring. IT IS HER CHOICE! Most Industrialized nations understand this….it is only in the U.S. that such fret is given to the matter. Fortunately for most of the younger generation…the matter has been been decided…a matter of the woman’s privacy. Your chance to change history on this matter has now passed. Since you seem to believe in human rights…let’s support the rights of the humans who are already here….including the repressed teenagers who have been denied the information and contraceptives that they should have easy access to. That will help to have a far healthier society. A New Day is dawning. I have HOPE!

  23. November 17, 2008 at 9:10 pm

    Bryan, finally some specifics on the table to talk about. These are great ideas. Are these options that you yourself are willing to participate in? Or is this just a way to criticize me for speaking out?

    Robyn, thanks for interacting. The example of Mother Theresa was an example of someone motivated by religion whose actions we both presumably think are admirable. The fact that she was a Roman Catholic rather than an Evangelical is further confirmation that religion can have a positive effect on people. But ultimately I am more interested in God than in religion.

    You say that we are doing the world no favors by having unwanted children. I agree. On this logic, is it okay to kill all unwanted children under 18 years old? No. Why not? Because it would be morally wrong. I am arguing that abortion is just as morally wrong. So although it might appeal to our emotions to prevent unwanted children from becoming adult criminals, it has no logical force against the particular argument I have made in this post.

    You say that a germinated egg is not yet human, just a potential human. I can find no non-arbitrary reason for believing this. A fetus is a human, not a potential human. Every mother who has felt her baby kick inside her womb knows this. The fact that a fetus cannot continue to live apart from his or her mother does not make him or her less human. If it did, then every person who needs medical life support would be less than human. When does a person begin to exist? The easiest answer, it would seem, is to say that we begin to exist at our conception, when the egg is fertilized. If you are going to disagree, you will have to provide some sort of argument, not merely asserting that you believe it and assume I should accept it on those grounds. I have given some objective facts that point to fetuses being human. Can you do the same for your view?

  24. November 18, 2008 at 6:24 am

    RT:
    I’m just as apathetic as the next guy so I don’t know how willing I am to do any of that stuff. That’s one of the reasons I can’t honestly say I beleive abortion is murder. If I did then I would probably be willing to do all that stuff (or I would just be a lazy coward : )

    I’m not looking to criticize you RT, I’m just attempting to throw some rhetoric back in the direction of those pro-lifers who become very self righteous about their stance and judgmental towards those who don’t agree with them or who would vote for a pro-choice candidate. They’re living in an illusion of innocence. As I mention I see quite a bit of it on other more conservative blogs (not yours).

    However if you feel those are some appropriate things for you to do then by all means. I guess the main point I’m making is that if people truly beleive abortion is murder (on the same level as killing children or adults), then their actions in response to it should reflect that belief… especially if they’re Christians.

    Bryan L

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: